quote_contextGet a free price, route, latency, and policy quote without retrieving the page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Public HTTP or HTTPS page to retrieve. | |
| question | No | Task or question used to rank relevant passages. | |
| max_tokens | No | ||
| max_price_usd | No | ||
| freshness_seconds | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description only adds the 'without retrieving the page' behavior, which is useful. It does not disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, caching, or how freshness_seconds affects results. With annotations covering safety, the description adds some value but remains limited.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, compact sentence that immediately conveys the core function and key differentiator. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it highly efficient.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, but the description does not explain what a 'quote' consists of, how the output is structured, or how parameters influence results. It only addresses the 'without retrieving' aspect, leaving major gaps for an agent deciding on invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is only 40% (only url and question have descriptions). The description does not explain the meaning of max_tokens, max_price_usd, or freshness_seconds, nor does it relate these to the quoted 'price, route, latency, policy'. This leaves 60% of parameters effectively undocumented in both schema and description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool provides a price, route, latency, and policy quote without retrieving the page. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'retrieve_context', which presumably retrieves the full page content. The verb 'get' and specific resource 'quote' make the purpose unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'without retrieving the page' implies this tool is for lightweight information needs, contrasting with a full retrieval tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to prefer this over 'retrieve_context', leaving the guidance implicit rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: one provides a quote without retrieving the page, and the other performs the actual retrieval. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern (quote_context, retrieve_context), using consistent snake_case. This makes the tool naming predictable and easy to understand.
With only 2 tools, the server feels minimal. While the narrow domain could justify a small set, this is borderline and might limit flexibility for more complex use cases.
The server covers its core workflow completely: quote first, then retrieve. There are no obvious gaps for the stated purpose of relaying context from public HTML with a cost quote.